At What Age did The Virgin Mary Mary Joseph?

Muslims are often embarrassed by the commonly held view that Mohamed married Aisha, one of his many wives, when she was 6 and consummated the marriage when she was 9.  There are more details but that is not the topic here.

In any case one way Muslims deflect from this is to claim that Mary was very young, and Joseph was very old, when they were married.  Evidently there is something in the "Catholic Encyclopedia" that gives credibility to this notion.  Then again Catholics have an interest in preserving the non-Biblical idea of the "ever-virginity" of Mary, and this idea that Joseph was very old helps justify this notion.  So for example, if Joseph were a young, healthy man when they got married, it would be not be as plausible that Mary remained a virgin forever.  In contrast if he were, say 99 years old and could barely able to stand, then yes, there is no danger to her virginity.


But, if you think about it the title "virgin" applies to people of a certain age.  You do not call a baby a "virgin", nor a small girl.  This is only given to persons of appropriate maturity.
Therefore we can say that the virgin Mary was not a young child when she was married to Joseph.

Let me show you something  from Mark chapter 5:

23 ...and begged him much, saying, “My little daughter is at the point of death. ...

39 And when he was entered in, he saith unto them, Why make ye a tumult, and weep? the child is not dead, but sleepeth ...

40 And they laughed him to scorn. But he, having put them all forth, taketh the father of the child and her mother and them that were with him, and goeth in where the child was.

42 And straightway the damsel rose up, and walked; for she was twelve years old. And they were amazed straightway with a great amazement.
41 And taking the child by the hand, he saith unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise.
42 And straightway the damsel rose up, and walked; for she was twelve years old. And they were amazed straightway with a great amazement.

Now contrast this with Luke chapter 1:

26 Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

So the twelve year old girl was called "Little daughter", "child",  "damsel", while Mary was called "virgin".

God Does not Change

The favorite argument of non-scholar Muslims is that Jesus is God, and therefore (any number of contradictions).

Here is one of them:

6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore you sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Malachi 3:6

The assertion is that Jesus (who is God) changed in that :

• he became mortal, and God is immortal
• Jesus did not know the day or the hour of his return, neither do the angels in heaven, but the Father does.

My suggestion is that this is taking the word "change" hyper-literally.

If I close my eyes, do I change?

If I change my shirt do I change?

I may have answers for the questions above, because I understand these concepts.  But when it comes to God, is it possible that he can take on a human nature and not change?

We really do not know enough about God to answer that, nor do we know what "change" means in this context.  It actually appears that in this context "change" refers to the principles of God, so that the Jews were not judged or destroyed through their disobedience and falling away.

"How Do You Pray?"

I was asked this once.
This simple question brings many opportunities for success and failure.
For example, it is not a given whether you pray to God, to Jesus or the Holy Spirit, or to Mary.  In Muslims' view of Christianity, they are all at about the same level.  At the same time it opens the door to present a lot of teaching of Jesus against what the Pharisees did, and that is similar to what Islam currently does.  How did Issa's teachings became so contrary to Islam?  This is a question for Muslims.

Concerning prayer, Jesus presented God as a loving father (unlike Islam).

There is no special vocabulary used to address God in the Bible (they did not do the equivalent of going from normal speech to a sort of royal 'thee', 'thou', 'thine' when talking to God.  Prayer is like normal conversation.

There is no specific position prescribed, such as kneeling or facing a certain direction (although Paul mentions  'lifting holy hands').

Therefore, I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or argument.
(1 Timothy 2:8)

Prayer is done anywhere and everywhere and in different ways.

Praying, for the sake of to be seen to be praying, is discouraged, the same way as fasting to be openly seen is discouraged.  (In contrast Muslims have a well-known season of fasting.)

Jesus called for praying in secret and fasting in secret.

This link documents various body positions that have been documented in the Bible:

https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/practical-christian-living/posture-during-prayer

Concerning, umm... Female Things.

Muslims make a big deal of women and their periods.  This may be part of a larger scheme to cause a loss of self-esteem in women along with their unflattering attire that is prescribed.  One time I heard of a young lady who was killed outside a mosque because she had an accident when her period started while in mosque.

Women's menstrual cycles go entirely without mention in the New Testament.
There is a woman who had an issue of blood in Mark 5, but this was a chronic disease condition which was healed when she touched the clothes of Jesus.

We have the definitive statement:

²⁸ There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(Galatians 3:28) 

Should Christians believe the Apocryphal gospels?

Muslims believe that Jesus (whom they call Issa) received a message, which they call injeel, or Gospel. Jesus taught this message.  However somehow this message was lost.  As to where the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament come from, there is no good answer for this.

Muslims will sometimes make reference to the apocryphal gospels, such as the Gospel according to Barnabas to support their case for the original injeel.
However, Muslim Dawa-ists are extremely resourceful and perform extensive research, and
you can therefore be sure that if there were any apocryphal books that resembled or gave support to Issa's injeel, without discrediting their larger case, they would have it paraded it around everywhere long ago.
So the reality is that they only make  references in passing to these apocryphal books without going into detail.

And the bottom line is that Muslims are in the same situation as Christians; we can accept them or reject them.  Muslims reject these books and accept the Quran (for some reason).

Islam and Christianity agree on "Nothing"

I was once in a chat room where someone pointed out that there was cannibalism occurring in Syria according to news reports.  That person then overextended his argument by connecting this sort of occurrence with Islam.  When challenged on this he could not show how this was allowed in Islam.
Then to my surprise a knowledgeable apologist produced some instances of cannibalism from the hadith that appeared to give sanction that practice.  Then I began to wonder, is there any form of evil that is not found in Islam?  If you tried to patent some form of evil, what could you come up with that did not have prior art found in Islam?  I asked knowledgeable  and I was told "Nothing". (This is actually just in passing, not my main point). 

Here is the question I would like to pose: What is the worst evil that a person can do that is consistent with the Bible?  granted, God has and will executed judgment on people, and bad things have been done by people who took on the name of Christ.  But what evil can be justified from the Bible?
"Nothing".  I would like you to think about and be fully persuaded on this last point.

The Great Failure of Allah and Jesus

Muslims will tend to say that Allah saved Jesus from the cross because he was a good prophet and had done nothing wrong.
But look at the consequence of this:
There are around 2 billion Christians who believe that Jesus rose from the dead.
If Allah had just publicly saved Jesus from the cross, there would be that many fewer people destined for eternal hellfire.

We Christians believe that Jesus died so that those two billion people could go to heaven.  Islam believes that Allah saving one person causes those same two billion to suffer eternally in hellfire.

How can Allah blame Christians?  We just believe what we see, or what the early Christians saw and reported to us.  Allah caused it to appear that Jesus was Crucified.

This video explains this well:

Muslim Debater Shabir Ally's Jaw Dropped with the Answer of Christian Apologist Dave Hunt
https://youtu.be/935Hx1pr2FE

Do Muslims Worship Mohammed?

Muslims will strongly deny they worship their prophet, but here are some points to consider:

To become a Muslim one says the Shehada:

1)
"There is No God but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger."  When you see this written out Muslims will put Allah and Mohammed in the same line and same size print.

There is no Shehada without Mohammed.  For example, you cannot submit to Allah as a Muslim by saying just the first part and leaving Mohammed out.  Nor can you, for example, say Moses in place of Mohammed.
Therefore Mohammed has become the gateway to Allah, at the same level.

2)
Someone pointed out that you can curse Allah and you will have a chance to repent, but if you say something about Mohammed you will have your head handed to you quickly.

3)
Here is another point.  Have you ever thought who decides what "good" is?  A Christian minister once suggested that whatever God says is good, then it becomes good, and if God says something is not good then it is not good.

With Muslims there is a wider definition of "good" because they consider Mohammed an example for mankind.

For example, many Muslims believe that Mohammed married Aisha when she was 9 years old.  As a result of this belief there are many child brides married to men the age of their grandfathers.  It does not matter if Mohammed really did marry her at that age; what is important is that this is generally accepted.

So therefore Mohammed has equal standing with Allah by setting the standard (de-facto) for what "good" is by his actions.
But did Mohammed ever do anything wrong that would set a bad precedent?  See Item 2) above.

Do Wives have to Submit to their Husbands?

Muslims have to defend themselves against the charge that their religion does not prescribe good treatment for wives.  However, not having a good defense, they have a culture of finding fault with what the Bible prescribes concerning how husbands and wives should live.

Here is a verse that is often quoted:

²² Wives, submit to your own husbands as to the Lord, ²³ for the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of the body. ²⁴ Now as the church submits to Christ, so wives are to submit to their husbands in everything. 
(Eph 5:22-24)

The first point here is that whether the wife submits to her husband is between her and God.
The second point is that there is no mechanism provided for husbands to cause wives to submit to them if they fear disobedience from them (that is, there is none that works by force).

The third point is that the verse above is followed by a directive to husbands:

²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her.. 
(Eph: 5:25)

What did Jesus do for the church?  He died for the church.  That is a lot more than what is being asked of wives.

How Do You Prove Religious Arguments?

One thing that is strange is that people can have religious discussions for years on end without agreeing on conclusions. I would like to talk about how "proving" works in the field of mathematics.  Here is a field where we still use the concepts handed down to us from ancient Greece, without change.
One valuable "fact" that is handed down to us from that time is that there is an infinite number of prime numbers.  Here is how the proof goes:

Suppose there is only a finite number of prime numbers.  For simplicity, I will say there are 3: (p1, p2, p3).  Now let me calculate a new number, N, where N = p1*p2*p3 +1.
Now observe that if you divide N by any of your prime numbers (p1, p2 or p3) you will have a remainder of 1.
Therefore your claim that there is a finite number of prime numbers is wrong, so there must be an infinite number.

So that is the proof.
My point in bringing this up is that this is such a powerful concept, and yet it relies only on reasoning.  There was no blinking light at the end that shows the "proof" is correct.  All we have is the fact that for generations, nobody has been able to find a flaw in this reasoning.  Again, no blinking lights, but what makes it "true" is that no refutation has been found.